NCAA09 PS3 BP Online Dynasty

[Basebuck]

I'm all for it. I'd play as many human games as humanly possible.

I think 3 would be a good number next year. That will make it difficult for 3 or 4 users to go undefeated.

Piney, how much work will that require of you?

 

[IronBuckI]

I like the idea of making it even regardless of how many people are in your conference......It is sortof like punishing you for having users in your conference.

I would like it to be everyone play 3 or even 4, but make it even. However, I am one ofnthe new guys on the block. So, my input should be last.

Also, are we pretty close to advancing???

You're one of eleven guys in the league so your input should count for less than Piney's, but the same as the other 10 of us. Regardless of how much smarter we are than you due to our higher post count and rep scores.

Also, I don't think that we are advancing until after fanatic gets back on Tuesday.

 

[fanaticbuckeye]

Also, I don't think that we are advancing until after fanatic gets back on Tuesday.

I will be arriving back in Oklahoma around noon Tuesday and make it a priority to get my game in so I don't hold us up any longer.

Assuming our flights dont get delayed because of oxygen problems again; or flocks of geese that have declared jihad on jet engines.

 

[Basebuck]

I believe you are on a bye this week. So all you have left is recruiting!

Correct.

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

whats the point in putting the "challenge" option in the game if they never let you challenge a questionable call?

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

just waiting for fanatic to recruit.

 

[Smooth Olaf]

I volunteer my services to do his recruiting for him.

 

[fanaticbuckeye]

just waiting for fanatic to recruit.

I would say put me on Auto Pilot and advance it, but I am in tight recruiting battles with user controlled teams and don't trust the computer to do recruiting right.

I volunteer my services to do his recruiting for him.

I appreciate the offer and I trust you would do your best for the fighting mormons, but you'll understand if I respectfully decline for fear of others interfering with you and altering your agenda ...

please make sure that you take all of his 5-star players off the boards!

Also, I corrected my post yesterday. I will be home on Tuesday at noon.

 

[Basebuck]

I would say put me on Auto Pilot and advance it, but I am in tight recruiting battles with user controlled teams and don't trust the computer to do recruiting right.

Good call. The computer does a piss poor job of recruiting against users.

 

[Piney]

Time for the sliders/speed debate...

So I have been doing a lot of research on sliders and what not..........

What have I concluded???? Not a whole hell of a lot, there is fifty trillion ideas out there and they all have pros and cons. I believe bumping up to Heisman may help out a bit, but I think it will also introduce some more of those random plays that have us wanting to throw the controller at the TV!!!!

However, there seemed to be one consensus idea that most people were leaning to. Making some sort of cap on speed for offensive players. Say..........92 speed.

I sort of like this, however I think the dependence on speed by some users will shoot this idea down. Keep in mind, it doesn't mean you can't recruit 4.18 WR........you just can't play them at WR.

Just think, our dynasty would be LOADED with top notch CB's and DE's!

Just another thought.......

eh

I dont really like the idea of capping the speed of offensive players

there are ways to contain speed if you are playing human vs human games

the problem is, the computer is really bad at defending really fast players, which there is really nothing you can do about unless you adjust the sliders giving the computer a lopsided advantage

the idea of jacking sliders to give the computer godlike skills isnt too appealing though

yea thats true

but what happens when all the speed starts going to defense?

97-98-99 speed guys in peoples secondaries when the fastest guy allowed in your receiving core and backfield is 92 or so?

its one of those things where either way you go one side is going to have a advantage over the other

This weekend I tried a ton of slider combos. And like whobe, there is not a slider set out there that can account for the speed that some teams have.

Heck, even alot of slider sets out there have people adding house rules to make their 'sliders' work. Either limiting speed or forcing players to play in a certain way.

So we basically have a choice, make the sliders difficult (ie heisman) where some people might feel the need to switch teams and the CPU 'cheating'. But even then switching teams requires probable a few years worth of recruiting to get enough speed to match up against other human teams.

Or we start making 'house rules'. The options I have seen is of course limiting speed in recruiting (I can also go in and edit the speed rankings of user teams to whatever limit we put in, so you can still recruit speed players, but I just tone down their speed)

Other house rules I see is no user catch (ie you can't take control of your WR until he catches it) this also applies for DBs to limit user picks (ie no switching to the DB defending the ball). Of them all this might work the best.

The others are no controlling players on offense except for the QB, ie you let the CPU run with your RBs. Then also only letting Corso pick your offensive plays. (These seem to cut out alot of the fun in playing, but just posting them in full disclosure)

These are the ones I see, so plesse give your feedback on those options and any other ideas.

I like the idea of making it even regardless of how many people are in your conference......It is sortof like punishing you for having users in your conference.

I would like it to be everyone play 3 or even 4, but make it even. However, I am one ofnthe new guys on the block. So, my input should be last.

I can easily add more human non-conference games. But that doesn't really solve the issue of the Big 12. But the good thing there is every other year Colorado doesn't play TAMU/Okie St.

 

[Basebuck]

So we basically have a choice, make the sliders difficult (ie heisman) where some people might feel the need to switch teams and the CPU 'cheating'. But even then switching teams requires probable a few years worth of recruiting to get enough speed to match up against other human teams.

I played a few Heisman games this weekend and it seems like it would be a pain in the ass for quite a few people. There is really some unrealistic stuff that goes on in Heisman. The teams ranked above 80 wouldn't have a problem but I'm afraid this would wreck the league for everyone else. Not worth the risk IMO

Or we start making 'house rules'. The options I have seen is of course limiting speed in recruiting (I can also go in and edit the speed rankings of user teams to whatever limit we put in, so you can still recruit speed players, but I just tone down their speed).

I don't have a problem with anything under 97 speed. A WR/RB with above 97 speed is impossible to stop. This sounds reasonable to me.

Other house rules I see is no user catch (ie you can't take control of your WR until he catches it) this also applies for DBs to limit user picks (ie no switching to the DB defending the ball). Of them all this might work the best..

This seems to take most of the skill out of the game. I would be against this one. I would never throw the ball. That would get boring. I'm guessing Buchtel would be all for it though.

The others are no controlling players on offense except for the QB, ie you let the CPU run with your RBs. Then also only letting Corso pick your offensive plays. (These seem to cut out alot of the fun in playing, but just posting them in full disclosure).

I agree, this seems like the worst.

I can easily add more human non-conference games. But that doesn't really solve the issue of the Big 12. But the good thing there is every other year Colorado doesn't play TAMU/Okie St.

This might be the answer IMO. You give everyone 4 user vs user games and it would really slow down how many teams are undefeated every year.

 

[Piney]

This seems to take most of the skill out of the game. I would be against this one. I would never throw the ball. That would get boring. I'm guessing Buchtel would be all for it though.

Actually I think Buchtel would hate it since my guess is alot of his picks are user pics (they have to be user pics right?) But I am thinking the limiting WR/DB user aided catches/ints would be more needed if we didn't adjust speed rankings.

But the limit wouldn't be 97, I am more thinking in the 92-95 range. We would also limit CB speed a little (to prevent 97-99 speed CBs everywhere) But I am thinking the CB/S limit would be 2 pts higher than the RB/WR/QB limit. (and I am throwing QBs in there to limit guys like me that run option offenses cuz then you would try really hard for 97+ speed QBs if there is such a thing.

 

[fanaticbuckeye]

So we basically have a choice, make the sliders difficult (ie heisman) where some people might feel the need to switch teams and the CPU 'cheating'. But even then switching teams requires probable a few years worth of recruiting to get enough speed to match up against other human teams.

I can live with going up to Heisman without the other "rules."

Or we start making 'house rules'. The options I have seen is of course limiting speed in recruiting (I can also go in and edit the speed rankings of user teams to whatever limit we put in, so you can still recruit speed players, but I just tone down their speed)

Serviceable option to me. Right now 93 is great speed in our leagues and anything more is elite which I'm okay with. As the years go by it will get higher and higher, but if it was capped at 9X (whatever number) skill becomes more important than just one on one matchup exploiting an entire game.

Other house rules I see is no user catch (ie you can't take control of your WR until he catches it) this also applies for DBs to limit user picks (ie no switching to the DB defending the ball). Of them all this might work the best.

I do a ton of user catch; both offensively and defensively, so this would adjust my strategy immensely. Having said that, I am all for it if thats what everyone else wants.

 

[fanaticbuckeye]

But the limit wouldn't be 97, I am more thinking in the 92-95 range. We would also limit CB speed a little (to prevent 97-99 speed CBs everywhere) But I am thinking the CB/S limit would be 2 pts higher than the RB/WR/QB limit. (and I am throwing QBs in there to limit guys like me that run option offenses cuz then you would try really hard for 97+ speed QBs if there is such a thing.

My opinion would be cap RB/WR/CB/S at the same number and if any position is capped lower it would be QB

 

[Piney]

I can easily add more human non-conference games. But that doesn't really solve the issue of the Big 12. But the good thing there is every other year Colorado doesn't play TAMU/Okie St.

This might be the answer IMO. You give everyone 4 user vs user games and it would really slow down how many teams are undefeated every year.

4 user v user games might be tricky though. Ie for the guys that are alone in conferences. So that would mean MSU & Kentucky would not face one non-human non-conference game. (USF actually has 5 non-conference games so they at least have one)

Then how about ECU & SMU, or do we include our championship game as a human game since it seems we are never on each other's conference schedule.

But otherwise I like it. Just have to think it all through.